Background:
The workshop developed from discussions at the GAC GIS Division
Annual Business
Meeting in May 1996 in Winnipeg. Concern was expressed regarding the
diversity of
methods being used for storing and publishing digital geological data and
the resulting
difficulty in exchange and integration of geological data. It was felt
the GAC was an
appropriate association to propose standards for digital geological data.
Four workshop
coordinators were selected to identify four sectors of the Canadian
geoscience community;
Geological Survey of Canada, provincial geological surveys, industry, and
academic
institutions.
Workshop Purpose:
"To identify what standards were required for digital geological
data and set in place a
mechanism to develop or adopt, test, and implement those standards."
Participants:
The workshop was attended by 42 participants the majority of whom
were invited to
represent government agencies and companies. A complete list of project
participants is
provided in Appendix A.
Proceedings
9:00 Introduction by John Broome, GSC-Ottawa.
Brief outline of the background, purpose, program, and goals of the
workshop.
9:30 Dave Soller (USGS)
Described history and design of the USGS/AASG National Geologic Map
Database
initiative, which includes federal/state cooperation to develop various
standards.
10:00 Gary Raines (USGS)
Presented the philosophy, design and merits of the proposed USGS/AASG
geologic data model. Release of a beta version, for public comment, is
planned for
Summer, 1997.
10:30 Boyan Brodaric (GSC Ottawa)
Described Canadian contributions to the USGS/AASG Geologic Map
Database
Initiative and discussed existing Canadian and GSC initiatives.
10:45-12:30 Unscheduled Participant Presentations:
Peter Davenport (Newfoundland Geological Survey)
Presented Newfoundland view on the importance of
development of
metadata and data standards.
Demonstrated the power of standardized geological data using
existing
Newfoundland digital data sets.
Steve Colman-Sadd (Newfoundland Geological Survey)
Discussion of Newfoundland Geolegend System and Newfoundland
Digital products.
Brian Berdusco (Ontario Geological Survey)
Description of existing OGS databases and standards as well as
plans for
future developments.
Interest was expressed in OGS geological metadata
standards.
Geoff Chinn (Noranda Exploration)
Noranda uses distributed desktop GIS operated by geologists
and, in
larger camps, by centralized GIS databases supported by GIS
specialists.
Complicated SQL statements are not a practical tool for the
majority of
geologists therefore GIS products that require complex SQL statement to
query and map information hinder their usage by geologists.
The georelational model is suitable for relatively static GIS
products but
difficult to implement in a dynamic (mapping/data collecting)
environment
Noranda routinely works with diverse information from many
countries
but has developed its own internal geoscientific data standards and
productivity tools.
It is important that government GIS information be released in
a GIS
interchange format, not a CAD format. The specific GIS file format used
is less important.
Access to Canadian map information through both spatially and
logically
searchable metadata should be improved.
Daniel Lebel (GSC-Calgary)
Supported USGS-AASG model but emphasized the importance of
providing support for a wide range of data types of , multimedia, 3D,
etc.
Tom Gammage (Western Mining Corporation)
Agreed with opinions presented by Inco and Noranda.
Felt data standards were important for government but of
reduced utility
for industry.
First priority should be to get data published in digital
form,
standardization was of secondary importance
12:30-1:30 Lunch
1:30-3:00 Discussion of Metadata Access and Standards
NRCan initiatives such as LINC, GeoAccess and CEOnet were discussed
briefly.
The GSC Internet map server project was discussed as was the existing
British
Columbia Mapguide Server demonstration site.
There was agreement that the GAC did not need to concern itself with general geospatial access, infrastructure, tools and standards as other groups were concentrating on these issues.
The need for geological metadata standards was identified. There was
agreement
that existing general metadata standards needed to be expanded to
incorporate
essential geological elements. Some existing geological metadata
standards were
discussed.
Government of Ontario Geospatial Metadata -Basic Content
Requirements
Information and Technology Standard, GO-ITS-72.0
FGDC Content Standard for Geospatial Metadata
ISO standards were felt to be desirable due to their international
acceptance but
geology-specific standards are lacking. The GIS division should
concentrate on
selecting metadata standards for use throughout the Canadian Geoscience
Community. Development of access initiatives in the GSC, such as the
Internet
Map Server Project, and elsewhere should continue in parallel with GIS
Division
standards deliberations.
Cameron Bowie volunteered to chair up a GIS Division Committee to
investigate
available geological metadata standards. A quick show of hands indicated
a number
of participants were willing to participate in the committee and Bowie
proceeded to
compile a list of interested individuals (list in Appendix B).. As a
first step, the
committee would collect available metadata standards and make them
available for
comments. It was suggested that the Committee contact Peter Schweitzer,
at the
USGS, who is also working on geoscience metadata issues. John Broome
volunteered to post metadata standards information on the GIS-Division
Web site.
3:30-5:00 Discussion of Geological Data Standards
The role of the GAC GIS divisions in the development of geological data
standards
was discussed. The advanced state of the USGS-AASG initiative was noted
and
there was general agreement that, if acceptable, it could possibly be
adopted. It was
noted that to realize the anticipated benefits of adoption of the data
model and
facilitate use of the geological map data by non-geologists, users might
want to
develop one or more standards lists of lithological and structural
attributes and
adopt a common framework for the map legend. It was pointed out that
scientific
standardization was a complex and difficult process. Another hurdle in
acceptance
of the data model was the lack of application software that would shield
the user
from the complexity of the design. Raines and Soller reported that
development of
this software was about to start.
There was agreement that the GAC GIS Division should formally evaluate the USGS-AASG data model and file a formal report. This approach was encouraged by Raines and Soller who were looking for critical evaluation of their design. Boyan Brodaric was nominated to chair a GIS Division committee to evaluate the data model. Brodaric expressed concern that as a major participant in the design of the database he could be in a conflict of interest position. Participants reaffirmed their desire that Brodaric chair the committee due to his expertise in this area. Brodaric compiled a list of 13 workshop participants (Appendix B) who would evaluate the data model and report to Brodaric.
The need for future meetings to discuss standards issues was discussed. Many participants felt that another meeting should not be scheduled until there was specific progress to report and that a meeting could be scheduled at that time.
Specific Results and Action Items
1) The GAC GIS Division supports the development of standards for geological metadata and data. Supporting development of geological metadata standards is identified as a principal requirement for improving Canadian access to geoscience metadata and a priority for the GIS Division. Development or adoption of standards for geological data is also seen as important process which the GIS Division should participate in.
2) A Canadian Geoscience Metadata Standard Committee (Chair:
Cameron
Bowie, participant list in Appendix B) was formed to develop GAC
geological metadata
standards..
Existing standards definitions Web posted for review by July
1997
Evaluation by Oct. 31, 1997, GAC metadata draft geological
metadata standards
distributed for comment by Dec. 1997.
3) A Geological Data Model Committee (Chair: Boyan Brodaric,
Participant list in
Appendix C) was formed to produce a GAC evaluation the USGS/AASG geologic
data
model for delivery by Dec. 31,1997.
Appendix A: Workshop Participants
GSC:
1. Graeme Bonham-Carter GSC-Ottawa
2. Leslie Chorlton GSC-Ottawa
3. John Broome (coordinator) GSC-Ottawa
4. Boyan Brodaric GSC-Ottawa
5. Dave Everett GSC-Ottawa
6. Bruce Palmer GSC-Calgary
7. Eric Boisvert GSC-Quebec
8. Jean Dougherty GSC-Ottawa
9. Daniel Lebel GSC-Calgary
10. Mike Cherry GSC-Ottawa
11. David Viljoen GSC-Ottawa
Phyllis Charlesworth GSC-Ottawa
Annette Bourgeois GSC-Ottawa
Danny Wright GSC-Ottawa
Stephen Williams GSC-Pacific
Provincial
1. William P.LeBarge INAC-Yukon
2. Dennis Chao Alberta G.S.
3. Ralf Maxeiner Saskatchewan E.+M.
4. Paul Lenton Manitoba E.+M.
5. Peter Taylor Ontario G.S.
6. Zoran Madon Ontario G.S.
7. Brian Berdusco Ontario G.S.
8. John Langton New Brunswick Dept.N.R.
9.Janette Vavra Nova Scotia Dept.N.R.
10.Steve Colman-Sadd (coordinator)Newfoundland G.S.
11.Peter Davenport Newfoundland G.S.
12.Doug Irwin GNWT
13.Denis Racicot MNR Quebec
Canadian Industry
1. Cameron Bowie INCO-Sudbury
2. Alan Aubut INCO-Thompson
3. Geoff Chinn Noranda Exploration
4. Mike Peshko Noranda Exploration
5. Vicki Bannister Cominco
6. Xiaodong Xhou Barrick Gold Corp.
7. Tom Gammage Western Mining Corp.
8. Ian King Open Data Designs Inc
Graham Ascough(coordinator) Noranda was unable to
attend
International
1. Gary Raines USGS
2. Dave Soller USGS
3. Alan Clare Neural Mining Solutions (Australia)
4. Jody Hatzell Western Mining Corp. (Reno, NV)
Academia:
1. Paul Williams(coordinator) Univ. of New Brunswick
2. Rob Harrap Queen's U.
Appendix B:
Canadian Geoscience Metadata Standard Committee Participants
Cameron Bowie (Chairman) Inco Exploration-Sudbury
Bruce Palmer GSC Calgary
Dave Soller USGS
Dennis Chow Alberta G.S.
Brian Berdusco Ontario G.S.
John Langton New Brunswick G.S.
Peter Davenport Newfoundland Department of Mines
Geoff Chinn Noranda
Phyllis Charlesworth GSC, Ottawa
Alan Aubut Inco Exploration, Thompson
Dave Viljoen GSC, Ottawa
Denis Racicot Ministere des Ressources Naturelles -
Quebec
John Broome GSC, Ottawa
Appendix C:
Geologic Data Model Committee
Boyan Brodaric(Chairman) GSC-Ottawa
Zoran Madon Ontario G.S.
Brian Berdusco Ontario G.S.
Peter Taylor Ontario G.S.
Eric Boisvert GSC-Quebec
Steve Colman-Sadd Newfoundland G.S.
Ian King Open Data Designs Inc
Danny Wright GSC-Ottawa
Dennis Racicot MNR Quebec
Bruce Palmer GSC-Calgary
Dennis Chao Alberta G.S.
John Langton New Brunswick Dept.N.R.
David Viljoen GSC-Ottawa
Rob Harrap Queen's U.